Path: csiph.com!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: The Starmaker Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity Subject: Re: Variable Time and the Variable Speed of Light Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 15:55:29 -0700 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 61 Message-ID: <5B775261.30D1@ix.netcom.com> References: <6fceaded-718d-4c9b-ba23-577dd41380ec@googlegroups.com> <17ac85e4-a387-4576-a197-16f26c590375@googlegroups.com> <5B773477.2812@ix.netcom.com> <936d16ec-0730-45c4-a663-7a2848b550fd@googlegroups.com> <5B7742DA.2D1E@ix.netcom.com> Reply-To: starmaker@ix.netcom.com NNTP-Posting-Host: X9ItFNC7Zcz4l6MobL/YRA.user.gioia.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 180817-4, 08/17/2018), Outbound message X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U) X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.3 Xref: csiph.com sci.physics.relativity:468186 The Starmaker wrote: > > Ed Lake wrote: > > > > On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 3:47:40 PM UTC-5, The Starmaker wrote: > > > Ed Lake wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 15, 2018 at 11:48:17 AM UTC-5, Ed Lake wrote: > > > > > Hey guys, I'm baaaack. > > > > > > > > > > I just put a new paper on vixra.org. It is titled "Variable Time and the > > > > > Variable Speed of Light." Here is the link: http://vixra.org/pdf/1607.0289v6.pdf > > > > > > > > > > And here is the opening paragraph: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since the facts in that paragraph are undeniable, I assume everyone here fully agrees with it. Nevertheless, I'd be interested in your thoughts. :-) > > > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > Okay, let's describe the problem in a different way: > > > > > > > > 1. The speed of light is measured to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND atop a mountain. > > > > > > > > 2. The speed of light is measured to be 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > > > 3. A second is measured to be "9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium-133 atom” at BOTH the top and the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > > > 4. HOWEVER, A COMPARISON of seconds accomplished by sending timed pulses up and down the mountain shows that a second is shorter at the top of the mountain than it is at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > > > 5. And many other experiments also show that time ticks faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain even though the COUNT of ticks per second is the same in both locations. Whatever you use to measure local time will measure time to be faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > > > 6. This means that, since the length of a second is shorter at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain, then 299,792,458 meters PER SECOND is faster at the top of the mountain than at the bottom of the mountain. > > > > > > > > If this is wrong, please explain in plain English where it is wrong. > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > > Time is not measured in seconds. > > > > Instead of must making silly statements, why don't you explain yourself? > > > > If "Time is not measured in seconds," HOW is time measured? I can find a thousand sources which give the speed of light per second. > > > > Ed > > I used plain English where it is wrong. > > Nature does not use seconds to measure time. That's a human thing... > > Time does not flow forward in...seconds. let me put it this way... if you film light traveling at the speed of light...and you fast forward the film, does the light travel faster? and you showing the same film but at slower motion..does the light travel slower? Has the speed of light changed?